Dr. Keith Debbage from UNCG and Guilford County Planning Director Greg Niles were two of the many local planning experts who have spent untold hours gathering the information needed to feed into the computer models as well as providing the local expertise and perspective to keep such a study relevant to our local resources and needs.
Supporters of the HOT project such as steering committee co-chair Robbie Perkins were present to explain the maps and answer questions --
Included below are the four conceptual drawings that were presented for public review. I must stress that they are a BEGINNING point reflecting a variety of growth opportunities for the future. They are not final nor set in stone; we know that the final version will likely be a combination of the best elements of each. The consultant will narrow the four maps down to three based on comments submitted this evening and will conduct a cost-benefit analysis, project how many jobs and what type will be created, and compute transportation impacts on those scenarios. Using all that input and information, the steering committee will make a final decision on the best option to present to the six local governments for their consideration.
HDR expanded the original study area to include 18,000 acres of land in the vicinity of the Forsyth/Guilford county line. These drawings of that area are very rough and intentionally do not have any of the political jurisdiction boundaries on them. I think you can get your general bearings by identifying the I-40/Business 40 split west of Sandy Ridge Road, knowing that Greensboro is on the right side of the drawing, Winston-Salem and Kernersville to the left, and High Point at the bottom.
The color codes are as follows:Purple and brown = employment districts and centers
Yellow = residential
Green = agricultural uses, parks and open space
Dark blue = sports venues
Pink = retail and entertainment
Light blue = institutional
Orange = village centers, urban neighborhoods
Red = town centers, transit-oriented development
Concept A concentrates the most intense development in two opposing corners - in the vicinity of the I-40 split at the top and near the Dell plant at the bottom. It shows a transit-oriented village to take advantage of the rail line north of I-40 and its potential for light rail commuter service.
Concept C places a sports center in the center of the development served by a meandering parkway through the center of HOT.
Concept D disperses development over a larger area rather than concentrating it in smaller areas. (Please pardon my fuzzy photography in this one; I think you can still get the general picture.)
* The consultant could have skipped his detailed explanations about land use and how they interact with each other. The most frequent comments I heard were based on personal interests such as "I like Concept (fill in the blank) because it leaves my property alone" or "I like Concept (fill in the blank) because I want to sell my land and you've designated it for development - big $$$ for me."
* Judging from the large amount of park areas and open space, it's evident the consultant heard and honored this request from many local residents. On the flip side, I heard some grumbles from developers that they had not included enough development in the proposals.
* I'm a bit disappointed that the consultants did not identify or recommend many specific businesses or industries that should be recruited for this area. There has been so much talk about needing to identify the "it" or "brand" for this area, and I'm not sure I've heard that yet.
* Along that same vein, there was a lot of discussion about the need to create a "sense of place," but that seems to be missing at this point. In a private conversation with me, one resident observed that this area already has a "special feel" that HOT should not be allowed to destroy.
* Earlier in the week, I walked into one of the steering committee sessions to find a piece of chart paper taped to the wall containing suggestions to construct a new coliseum to host the ACC Tournament, to relocate the ACC headquarters, and construct a convention center in HOT. I made a pointed observation that we had agreed not to steal existing things from any of our jurisdictions to place in HOT, but if we were going to abandon that basic tenet, where were the proposals to move High Point's Furniture Market or Winston's biotech research park here as well? I noticed there was no mention of ANY of those proposals this evening. [smile]
* It will be interesting to observe reactions and participate in the political deliberations once a final plan is formulated and presented. At this very preliminary point, it appears that the most intense employment development (in other words, more increased tax base) is concentrated more in Forsyth County while infrastructure improvements such as sewer might be more easily provided by High Point (Guilford County). Will all six jurisdictions be able to identify "wins" and support the HOT proposal with the necessary money and resources? And if they do, where does that funding come from? What will be the governance structure, if any, and will there be revenue sharing?
Stay tuned - the work has just begun!
6 comments:
Doe Robbie Perkins' company own or represent the owners of any property in the effected area?
Roch,
When Robbie was elected as co-chair of the steering committee, he was asked this same question by one of the other committee members. He publicly stated that he/his company did not. That's the only information I have to answer your question.
Good post Ms. Carmany, and very informative! I would agree that one of the things to stress in this process is to create something unique that will not simply pull away from existing efforts, particularly in the nearby urban areas. They've got enough competition from "the suburbs" and "greenfields".
Transportation/logistics seems to make the most sense as a driving force related to economic development and it is nice to incorporate residences and open spaces into the concept since most folks agree that's a problem with RTP.
Should be an interesting process and hopefully will be something that finally solidifies regional cooperation in the Triad. We'll see...
Sandy, I seem to remember Mr. Perkins' co-chair, Arnold King, making a similar declaration about his business interests in the region as well, seeing as how he is also involved in real estate. Correct me if I'm wrong. But I thought I'd throw that out there since Roch was asking and that question probably ought to apply to both.
Jonathan,
You are correct. Co-chair Arnold King also stated he had no real estate interests in the HOT area.
With all due respect, we still do not have a satisfactory answer for the conflict of interest question regarding Mr Perkins and perhaps Mr King. Okay, so they disavow any direct financial interest in HOT, but as far as Mr Perkins is concerned, I think we both know he is being less than sincere when he denies any financial incentive. His NAI-Maxwell signs are all over Colfax. While it may be true that he does not actually own the land that he sells, he will certainly profit from it at some point. This is familiar ground for Mr Perkins. He was a frequent "abstainer" on city council rezoning requests and it never bothered him even one little bit.
Post a Comment